Curtiss-Wright AT-9: The Other Jeep

[RB-18B]

And now for something totally different...

I am pleased to announce that MMP in the UK has released my new monograph as noted in the title of this thread, and members of WIX were instrumental in making it more complete. My thanks to all.

They are now in the production of another monograph on yet another "un-loved aircraft" series for me, the North American O-47 series. This will be followed by a monograph on the Lockheed P-38 series in Latin America (now under preparation, including service with the Sixth Air Force) and - steady on - a monograph on the Curtiss O-52 Owl.

[Scott Rose]

Congrats. Let us know when it becomes available.

[RB-18B]

Available now via Amazon, Casemate or the publisher at their web site Mushroom Model Publications (MMP) in the UK

[WIXerGreg]

https://amzn.to/2W3xXS7

[JohnB]

Sounds just weird/esoteric enough to be right up my alley!
I enjoyed your B-18 book (Probably the only book out there that seemingly lists every combat mission of a type).

Also, can we expect a sequel on the Beech AT-10?

Without a doubt, they are the two most forgotten American aircraft of WWII (But I'll give an honorable mention to the Fairchild AT-21 and the Curtiss SC Seahawk and SO3C Seagull/Seamew).
But given the Beech's greater production numbers, about three times the AT-9 total, it really should be better remembered then it is.

[RB-18B]

Well, if you have a chance to read the AT-9 book, you'll probably understand pretty quickly why a book on the AT-10 would end up being one endless tale of woe!

[JohnB]

Since my last post. I re-read your book on the AT-6, again, nice work.

But I will make a plea for a book/monograph/article on the AT-10.
I've been interested in them ever since I stumbled across the intact cabin of one (probably the largest piece outside the NMUSAF) behind an abandoned garage in Abilene, Texas circa 1997.

At that time, I did track down some locals who knew something about it (or them, At one time there were reputedly more than one in town).
It's said a farmer bought them at a surplus auction took the gear off (and I'd suppose the engines) and would tow it behind his tractor while the kids played pilot.

That piece later was at a local BBQ place (Harlow's, IIRC) that has a lot for aviation stuff in it, but I've lost track of it.

Last edited by JohnB on Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.

[airnutz]

That piece later was at a local BBQ place (Harlow's, IIRC) that has a lot for aviation stuff in it, but I've lost track of it.

Ditto that John. I was wondering if the Harlow's AT-10 cockpit section is one of the 2 donor sections that the Missouri AT-10 project started with? Project here....
www.at10wichita.com

[JohnB]

I've pre-order the AT-9 book, I'm looking forward to it.

[marine air]

Just wondering if the AT-9, O-47 and O-52 ever served in a combat zone or with an active duty squadron similar to the Bamboo bombers, Norsemen and Be-18’s that served with the 8th Air Force.

[JohnB]

I've never seen a photo of an AT-9 or 10 overseas.

As a two seater the AT-9 would be a lousy squadron hack of staff transport.
At least an AT-6 could've used as a recurrency and instrument trainer.

Going through my dad's (a B-17 pilot) records, it looks like he only trained in AT-17s for his multi-engined training.
I wonder if they used the AT-9s for just "hot" ships like B-26s?

Also, were P-61 pilots fighter pilots who converted to twins or multi-engined pilots converted to fighters? At any rate, perhaps they got some AT-9 time?

[Chris Brame]

Just wondering if the AT-9, O-47 and O-52 ever served in a combat zone or with an active duty squadron similar to the Bamboo bombers, Norsemen and Be-18’s that served with the 8th Air Force.

A few O-47s were destroyed on the ground during the Pearl Harbor attack, but that's about it; Baugher doesn't list any as having gone overseas but they did serve as U-boat hunters in the Canal Zone and the Caribbean.

As to the O-52, most of their descriptions in Baugher begin with "Wrecked"; almost all in the continental USA plus three or four in Puerto Rico and one in the Dominican Republic. We did give the Russians thirty of them via Lend-Lease; no idea what they did with them.

[Fearless Tower]

I've never seen a photo of an AT-9 or 10 overseas.

As a two seater the AT-9 would be a lousy squadron hack of staff transport.
At least an AT-6 could've used as a recurrency and instrument trainer.

Going through my dad's (a B-17 pilot) records, it looks like he only trained in AT-17s for his multi-engined training.
I wonder if they used the AT-9s for just "hot" ships like B-26s?

Also, were P-61 pilots fighter pilots who converted to twins or multi-engined pilots converted to fighters? At any rate, perhaps they got some AT-9 time?

Probably depends a lot on the timeframe/year.

By the end of the war they were using TB-25s for initial multi-training. The first twin my grandfather ever flew was a B-25, but he went through training in mid-45.

[Cvairwerks]

Got my copy on Friday and was just able to skim thru it. Lots of neat info. Wish that much stuff could come out of the woodwork for my AT-21!

[JohnB]

Received mine Thursday and have just skimmed it.
It looks impressive, it's great to see photos other than the 2-3 usually seen in books. Even a few period color photos.

I note that they were removed from service and sold as early as Jan 1945...before the war was even over!
I hope the text says why...
IF the AAF decided to use B-25s or other types...why?
It looks like they kept the Cessnas and AT-10s around longer.